A Cogitative Countenance

In class today, when Mr. Wasserman told us to reflect and just write about whether or not we felt “we made the right decision,” I initially just thought it was BS; just being honest here. Although now that I’ve had some time to reflect on it, I really think that it is a very significant question.

For the big picture, we are moving towards answering the question “How does this book challenge or confirm my fundamental beliefs about how the world works?” It could very well be that the question of whether or not we think we made a good decision, will define how well we can answer the question above. I personally felt that I did make the “right” or a good decision when it came to both my book and my group. Although “Snow Falling on Cedars” can be quite slow, dull, and boring at times, it definitely contains some content and some concepts that do challenge and/or confirm some beliefs of mine. Also, the people that I am working with are key to successfully answering such a question, because they bring up ideas and contribute their own thoughts and personality to the group, that allows me to have a better underdstanding and a deeper interpretation of the text.

So far there hasn’t been to many things that I think “Wow I totally agree,” or anything like that. I don’t know if it is because I’m just not paying attention to the text in a way that allows me to make such connections, or it could just be that my views don’t conflict or agree with the book to a significant event. It’s hard to explain, but I guess different things and beliefs are deffinitely different, and also the extent to which they care about them varies. So although nothing has popped out at me so far, I’m sure that something will come about, or I can really get into it and think about some of those issues that are just mild to me.

Looking back at this year in English class, there are not too many, in fact possibly not one negative thing to say. I like that, and I think that that is the key to a successful education. I’m definitely learning, although sometimes it is unconsciously due to the fact that the class can be a bit rowdy and off on a tangent occasionally. One of the major things this year has been these blogs. It is quite a new way of teaching and learning, so there have been some issues with blogging and all, but overall they are a great tool. I prefer sitting down and writing a brief but insightful blog post, rather than being trapped in the confines of an 8 x 11 sized essay. Most of our in class assignments and discussions have been brought onto the blogs, which allows for both a more in-depth discussion and analysis, and it also frees up more class time for even greater learning potential.

Reading classic novels such as Huck Finn and A Lesson Before Dying have also been good. I enjoy the deep discussions that our class gets into, whether or not they are strictly following the curriculum. I think that whatever we are discussing is learning, which is great about our English class. Mr. Wasserman usually never stops us and redirects us to discuss the “right” thing, which I believe to be a unique and very successful instruction method. In Mr. Wasserman’s latest blog post he really nails this issue when speaking about grading students’ papers:

I found myself losing sight of the big picture (Did Young Sir interact with the book, did he learn anything about literature or life, does he have something to write or talk about that he didn’t have before?)

I think that he is right to say that the little grades don’t matter, because except for looking “good” on your transcript, getting an “A” wont help a bit when you’re forced to face new real-life situations that you would have been better apt to deal with after interacting and analyzing a work. And I feel that in the first semester of English we really did gain something much more than just an “A” out of the pieces that we read.
Mr. Olmstead offers another great insight, saying that it was

virtually impossible for students to construct something that has value outside of the immediate classroom. Great lessons and projects usually end with a grade; rarely do they progress beyond the school setting. For this reason, one of the single biggest complaints that students have about school is its lack of relevance to their own lives or the world outside the school house gates.

This couldn’t be more realistic. There probably hasn’t been a day in the past five years where I haven’t said to myself “this is so ridiculous! Why do I care? What has this got to do with me or anything?” I personally do not see why I need to learn history or chemistry or other things; I usually think that I have this perspective because I just don’t care, but in actuality it is also because I do not make the mental link between this information and my own life, therefore having no use for the information. I never go home and start solving quantum physics equations or write a perspective paper about the Civil War. But the internet and new technology, as Mr. Olmstead says, holds the potential to break this cycle and begin a new era of schooling, and a new type of learning. By going home and blogging about our in-class current events discussion or about the concepts of fate versus free will in Macbeth, I am opening up and actually putting this newly acquired information to use. By “writing to the world” in this blog, I am creating an impression of myself to whomever may be reading this all. The connection between expressing myself through the information completes that mental link for me, making it all worth while.

Overall I can safely deem this first semester very successful in so many ways.

     This article from The Onion was actually quite amusing.  However, even if it had not been included in this satire study of ours, it would have been very obvious that it was not for real.  The concept of having a remote control to control a second remote control sounds completely crazy and impractical and far from logical.  But doesn’t it also sound like something that could totally happen one of these days.  I mean, with all of the new technology and everything hitting the markets today, we wouldn’t be at all surprised to see “a great remote for controlling all of your other hard-to-reach-from-the-couch remote controls!” advertised in stores.
     I think that the satire in this article is about how Americans can sometimes be attached to their TVs, and stuck in their couches.  It is scary to see how some people would be bothered by “an annoying task [of locating a remote] that can sometimes result in missed programming and, in some cases, serious waste of valuable television-viewing time,” because people actually think this way.  I know that I myself can get angry or upset over missing an “important” television program.  This is not the only problem with the way that people think today.

Should the second remote end up under a magazine or newspaper, the third remote will still be capable of controlling the second remote, enabling the second remote to change channels on the first one, and ultimately the television itself, with just the touch of a button . . . To ensure that the third remote is not lost as well, it will come with a handy adhesive pad affixing it to the owner’s forehead at all times. Or, in the case of more expensive models, it be implanted directly within the sinus passages of the user.

     Although this is highly amusing, it is very true and frightening.  Many people would push aside magazines and newspapers, which if read would enrich their minds, in order to grab that remote and watch TV.  The point of this “remote controlled remote control” would be to allow the user to make minimal movements while watching television.  The remote control itself allows watchers to move less, let alone prevent people from ever having to move for hours at a time.  Obesity is a growing problem in America, and this shows that it is becoming easier and easier for people to remain occupied while making minimal physical movement.  To go back to an original definition of satire, it humorously exposes a severe social issue, which is exactly what this piece from The Onion does.

Addition ! - Jan. 7, 2007 5:45pm
     What I said about obesity and how sitting in front of the television is a severe problem was true.  In fact, “sitting kills more than 300,000 Americans a year” according to this article.

     After reading the majority of the ”Life of Isaac Mason as a Slave,” I am astonished.  I had previously thought that I knew more than enough information about the lives that slaves led, but this narrative enhanced my understanding of the way slaves were treated in society.  Although the author does not always define who is a slave and who is white or in charge, the awful personal experiences that he depicts clearly show that he was a slave.  As a child and young teen, he was a house slave and was always standing by his mistress.  It was shocking to see that he was treated just as an object and not as a person, for as when the mistress died, he was just sold off to another master.  He was whipped and punished for the simplest of things, such as just going off with some friends; which was not even an attempt to escape.
     A difference between Isaac Mason’s life and Huckleberry Finn, was the escape of the two slaves.  Isaac’s escape was planned out and executed in a precise manner, whereas Jim just seemed to go missing one day, and was fortunate enough to run into Huck who helped him escape.The way that Isaac is constantly being followed and chased and how he mentions having to be “safe for a while” is very similar to Huck Finn.  Isaac Mason had to hide often, which is similar to how Jim has to hide and stay down low in the raft while they are traveling.  It is saddening to see how these people had to always be on the run, and could never feel safe or at home.

     Before I commence reading some of these slave narratives, I have the general impression that they will expose the problems with slavery.  These slaves who were lucky enough to learn to read and write show how miserable life as a slave was, and try to humanize slaves, surely against their white masters’ wills.  By giving the mass number of slaves a voice in the country, these narratives help to eventually gain freedom for all.  This voice reaches out to many Americans and gives them the sense that slavery is wrong.   I am looking forward to learning even more about this, and seeing how the truth shown through these authors’ eyes ties into our class reading of Huckleberry Finn.

     Racism seems to be a constant force in America.  I don’t think that we are driven by prejudice (although a few people may be), but it is more of just a presence.  I recently watched a “Primetime: Basic Instincts” show on ABC 7that exposed racism.  The producers placed hidden cameras inside taxi cabs, and instructed the drivers, who were actually hired actors, to make extremely racial slurs.  It was shocking to see that many of the passengers would agree with the driver, and even add more severe comments directed towards a certain group of people.  Very few people seemed offended by the remarks, and the program only showed one example of a woman standing up to the driver and defending a racial group.
     The show went on further to stage a fight between a couple in a park.  Over 60 people just walked on by when the couple was white, but 15 people did step in to help.  When the producers had African-American actors stage a fight, only 6 out of about 75 people tried to help, and most of them just told the couple to take it somewhere else.  This shows that people make generalizations about certain races, and that prejudice is certainly present today.  It is a scary fact especially when faced with these two scenarios; especially to see that racism that existed back in Mark Twain’s time is still carried on today.

     I was one of those few who went ahead and wrote my second satire blog before the assignment was posted to Wasserman’s blog, and I felt bad that I didn’t do what everyone else did, so here it is.

     I found the clip from the Colbert Report quite funny, but the point it was making was clearer and came across stronger to me.  As I watched I was a little confused as to what was going on and all, but upon watching it a second time it struck me how realistic it all was.  I found it very interesting how he used the statistics of how 56% of Americans did not want to go to war in Iraq to begin with, and 70% of Americans were unhappy with how President Bush is handling the situation.  He comes straight out to make this point and others similar to it, and this is why I would consider this satire.  He taking the truth and adding humor, but still remaining true to these startling statistics and facts about the nation.
     He is basically just stating the facts, making them clear (although it might help if he talked a little slower so they could actually sink in), and adding bits of humor and jokes here and there.  I think the position that the character is trying to promote is anti-war, because he states that reinstating the draft would add to war efforts, but more importantly would cause an uprising against the administration here at home in America.

     I recently found a video online that has been supposedly banned from MTV, because it makes a point.

“Faithless Bombs”

     The point that I got out of it was that Americans are just standing by, while this extreme war and fighting is going on.  What do you think?  How does this link into our discussion in AMH, and would you consider this satirical?

     Just going onto the CNN.com homepage showed me four links directly including racism (along with news of Lindsay Lohan’s one week of sobriety of course).  The headlines Blacks don’t feel welcome in some towns, How serious is racial bias, and Are we ready for a black president? cover the main page.  I think this alone shows that there is still much racism in the United States today.
     One of the most direct and informative things on the website, was the racism poll.  It states that many Americans, black and white, say that racism is a lasting problem in the U.S., and they also say that they see many racist people around them.  To me, it sounds like some of these people are racist themselves, but want to protect themselves and will not admit to it.  Come to think of it, not too many people will admit to being racist or discriminative against anyone when asked.  However, this does not make sense to me, because it is logical to assume that these people will not admit to being racist because they know that racism is a bad thing, and they want to hide it.  Why, even though they know it is bad and wrong, do such people still stay with their discriminative ways?  We have to wonder if racism will ever go away.  And with people hiding their racism, and dealing with it themselves, it only manifests itself deeper into that person, causing racism to be a lasting problem in the country.
     Since so many of my classmates commented on this article, I will choose to be different and review this recent trial.  A black trash collector was convicted of raping and murdering a white fashion writer.  During jury deliberations, many racial remarks were being thrown about, and at one point it got so intense that two jurors had to be separated.

The statements clearly indicate that these jurors were racially biased against the defendant before deliberations ever started.

It is bad enough that there are racist people in the world, let alone appointing those people to juries which are supposed to be unbiased in all manors.

According to the affidavits, filed by jurors identified only as Juror A, Juror B and Juror C, racist comments included snide remarks from a white female juror about a black female juror’s hairstyle and questions about her educational background; a white female juror commenting that she was afraid of McCowen, saying “the big black guy” was staring at “us”; and a black male juror’s comments that he did not like other blacks because “look at what they are capable of.”

     Seeing such comments against another person based on race is a sight that we shouldn’t see today.  However, it is difficult to remove something that has been around for so long.  What I mean by this, is racism and these ideas have been around for centuries.  The female juror’s remark about the educational background of another black juror relates back to times of slavery, when it was illegal for a slave to read and write.  And for years beyond slavery, black people still received sub-standard education in segregated schools, and this idea has stayed around, and is still acknowledged by some.

     Why is satire so popular?  I can provide one main answer.  Satire is often used in a comedic medium, which attracts all people to it.  And to add to that attraction, what is being made fun of is real.  I think that it is a great medium in which to expose social problems, because so many people are attracted to the comedic aspect, but within all of the jokes, there is a deeper meaning.  I think it’s great.
     Such an example of this is how I personally wanted to go see the Borat movie, because it seems extremely funny.  However, when reviewing certain aspects about the movie closer, you see that it really reveals problems with racism and other social problems in the U.S. today.  I recently viewed a Primetime or 20/20 program on ABC, and it explained how what was included in the Borat movie was actually true.  The non-satiristic program went on further to prove this, by placing hidden cameras inside of Las Vegas taxis, and having the cab drivers make vicious slurs against a certain social group and seeing how the passengers would react.  Most of them agreed with the drivers, and elaborated their own feelings, which turned out to be extremely hateful and prejudice.  This just goes to show that satire is realistic comedy.